An electric pickup isn’t a no-brainer for the US market. It’s a big-brainer.
Most EVs are shaped like running shoes for aerodynamics. Pickup trucks are big air smacking slabs. Larger pickup trucks advertise towing capacity as a major feature, EVs are bad at towing, again because of aerodynamics. The additional batteries and such required to make an EV pickup work are large, heavy and expensive. I think the technology needs to cook a bit before we get there.
Now on the compact pickup truck front…those are basically extinct. The Slate is almost a good attempt, the problem is it’s almost the anti-cybertruck. The Cybertruck is what you get when a billionaire nazi notices how thoroughly the drugs have emptied his scrotum. It’s the costume a truly awful male wears to cosplay as a man. The Slate is almost the equal and opposite, it’s what r/fuckcars thinks of when they start a sentence with “Can’t you just make do with…” A 20 year old S10 kicks the Slate’s ass in every way because the Slate is designed mostly to play dress-up like a barbie doll. They’re taking pre-orders but they won’t show you where the tie down points in the bed are.
The Slate is almost the equal and opposite, it’s what r/fuckcars thinks of when they start a sentence with “Can’t you just make do with…” A 20 year old S10 kicks the Slate’s ass in every way because the Slate is designed mostly to play dress-up like a barbie doll. They’re taking pre-orders but they won’t show you where the tie down points in the bed are.
Speaking as a mod of !fuckcars and the owner of a 30-year-old Ford Ranger, I want a Slate truck and I don’t think my current truck would be able to kick its ass. (Well, aside from off-roading, since the Slate doesn’t have a 4x4 version yet. And, uh, ease of refueling in the wilderness. Hmm.)
Okay, so maybe it wouldn’t be an upgrade in all ways, but IMO those tradeoffs are still worth it because the lack of telemetry and other enshittification means it’s the first modern mass-market electric car (of any type, truck or otherwise) I’ll be willing to own.
My S10 outranges a Slate by over 50%, refuels from empty to full in less than five minutes, seats 4, has a 6 foot bed, tows up to 7600 pounds…a Slate is a massive step back in a lot of ways.
My Ranger seats 3 in a pinch and is rated to tow 1600 pounds (2.3L I4, regular cab, manual, 4x4) so you can see how my perspective is a little different.
I don’t know enough about physics or cars to really rebut you but this doesn’t seem plausible to me.
I don’t think aerodynamics are particularly relevant to towing? Prime movers (tractor trailers?) are about the least aerodynamic vehicle there is but they regularly tow more than 100 tonnes at highway speed.
If I had to guess I’d suggest the primary problem is the relationship between system weight of the vehicle and load, battery capacity, and the battery’s weight. As in, if you want to be able to cart 1 ton for 200km then the additional battery requirement is another 300kg so that’s really only an extra 700kg so you need more battery and heavier frame and so on.
Another problem I suppose, and I emphasize that this is supposition, is optimising motors for both torque and speed. The torque required to break inertia with lots of weight in sandy or muddy terrain.
I don’t think aerodynamics are particularly relevant to towing?
Aerodynamics are extremely relevant to towing. “Aging Wheels” on Youtube did a test and found that payload weight makes basically no difference at all, but a trailer with bad aerodynamics can cut an electric truck’s range in half.
The maximum weight for a tractor-trailer rig in the United States is 80,000 pounds, 40 short tons or 36.36 metric tons.
A tractor-trailer rig is surprisingly streamlined. The cab is shaped and sized for the front of the trailer to ride closely in its wake, often with fairings that reach as close to the trailer as practicable. Sure it’s a brick, but it’s ONE brick:
A pickup truck towing a trailer isn’t anywhere near that slick, even with a gooseneck trailer, the trailer is often taller and wider than the cab. It’s a brick, attached to another, larger brick being pulled through the turbulent disturbed air from the first brick:
In terms of torque, EVs have a significant advantage. Electric motors produce a lot more torque at low to zero RPM than internal combustion engines do. Limited slip differentials or all-wheel drive are solved problems.
The additional energy required to accelerate the additional weight up to speed isn’t that much of a problem as an EV will get that back with regenerative braking. Well, some of it. Most trailers have brakes of their own that do help with braking distance but are there mostly to keep the hitch under tension to prevent jackknifing. An ICEV figures on losing all of that energy to friction braking, a BEV plans on recovering some of it. An electric pickup carrying 1000 pounds in the bed will be more efficient than one pulling a 1000 pound trailer, in most cases.
The maximum weight for a tractor-trailer rig in the United States is 80,000 pounds, 40 short tons or 36.36 metric tons.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at with this. Here in Australia road trains haul 90 metric tons of grain and fertilizer all the time, that doesn’t include the weight of the trailers.
Regardless, I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to illustrate - your example of a “streamlined vehicle” undoubtedly consumes a lot more diesel than your example of a vehicle which is not streamlined. Isn’t that antithetical?
In terms of torque, EVs have a significant advantage.
Yes, but a “truck” with a 4 ton towing capacity obviously needs motors with more torque than those on a tesla.
The additional energy required to accelerate the additional weight up to speed isn’t that much of a problem as an EV will get that back with regenerative braking. Well, some of it.
As little as 5 to 10% on the highway, not particularly significant. Installing regenerative brakes on a trailer is a lot of additional cost and complexity.
They very much are, depending on what you’re towing, most of your fuel used goes into overcoming aerodynamic drag. If you tow a load of gravel on a trailer, compared to a caravan of the same weight, the difference in fuel used can be double.
Towing something that’s not very aerodynamic can easily double your fuel use, which means half the range or less in an EV.
Yeah the electric pickup is such a no brainer for the US
Disagree. The truck market itself is a no brainer, but electric trucks have design challenges that electric sedans don’t. Namely, aerodynamics, towing, and aerodynamics while towing. It is much harder to make an electric truck capable of doing “truck stuff” with a reasonable range and price compared to making an electric car.
Correct, but now consider how much time and money has been spent over the decades on making sure that “trucks can do truck stuff” for combustion vs. electric drives. “it’s much harder” is true only in the context that thousands of years of engineering time have already been poured into diesel and gas trucks, and only a tiny fraction of that has yet been dedicated to electric. So it’s not “much harder” it just “hasn’t been funded yet at the level that the oil industry has provided combustion vehicles for nearly 100 years”.
It’s not a technology/research issue; it’s an economics issue. Trucks simply need an absolutely huge battery pack to brute-force not only themselves but a boxy trailer through the air for hundreds of miles, and all but one of them don’t actually have it (even at the very expensive prices they sell for).
Look up the curve of the density of energy storage for batteries the last 20-ish years and then honestly tell me this isn’t a technology issue in the midst of being addressed.
Harder maybe but it’s clearly doable. We have a number of options now. And it’s not like they’ve had to make them hyper-aerodynamic or anything. Just took a little more advanced battery tech.
IIRC, according to Aging Wheels on YouTube, of all the electric trucks, only one (the Chevy Silvarado) actually manages to have decent range while towing.
Yeah the electric pickup is such a no brainer for the US market and it was one of the first.
But what if it was horribly ugly and made everyone hate you? Surely it will sell even better then!
An electric pickup isn’t a no-brainer for the US market. It’s a big-brainer.
Most EVs are shaped like running shoes for aerodynamics. Pickup trucks are big air smacking slabs. Larger pickup trucks advertise towing capacity as a major feature, EVs are bad at towing, again because of aerodynamics. The additional batteries and such required to make an EV pickup work are large, heavy and expensive. I think the technology needs to cook a bit before we get there.
Now on the compact pickup truck front…those are basically extinct. The Slate is almost a good attempt, the problem is it’s almost the anti-cybertruck. The Cybertruck is what you get when a billionaire nazi notices how thoroughly the drugs have emptied his scrotum. It’s the costume a truly awful male wears to cosplay as a man. The Slate is almost the equal and opposite, it’s what r/fuckcars thinks of when they start a sentence with “Can’t you just make do with…” A 20 year old S10 kicks the Slate’s ass in every way because the Slate is designed mostly to play dress-up like a barbie doll. They’re taking pre-orders but they won’t show you where the tie down points in the bed are.
Speaking as a mod of !fuckcars and the owner of a 30-year-old Ford Ranger, I want a Slate truck and I don’t think my current truck would be able to kick its ass. (Well, aside from off-roading, since the Slate doesn’t have a 4x4 version yet. And, uh, ease of refueling in the wilderness. Hmm.)
Okay, so maybe it wouldn’t be an upgrade in all ways, but IMO those tradeoffs are still worth it because the lack of telemetry and other enshittification means it’s the first modern mass-market electric car (of any type, truck or otherwise) I’ll be willing to own.
My S10 outranges a Slate by over 50%, refuels from empty to full in less than five minutes, seats 4, has a 6 foot bed, tows up to 7600 pounds…a Slate is a massive step back in a lot of ways.
My Ranger seats 3 in a pinch and is rated to tow 1600 pounds (2.3L I4, regular cab, manual, 4x4) so you can see how my perspective is a little different.
I don’t know enough about physics or cars to really rebut you but this doesn’t seem plausible to me.
I don’t think aerodynamics are particularly relevant to towing? Prime movers (tractor trailers?) are about the least aerodynamic vehicle there is but they regularly tow more than 100 tonnes at highway speed.
If I had to guess I’d suggest the primary problem is the relationship between system weight of the vehicle and load, battery capacity, and the battery’s weight. As in, if you want to be able to cart 1 ton for 200km then the additional battery requirement is another 300kg so that’s really only an extra 700kg so you need more battery and heavier frame and so on.
Another problem I suppose, and I emphasize that this is supposition, is optimising motors for both torque and speed. The torque required to break inertia with lots of weight in sandy or muddy terrain.
Aerodynamics are extremely relevant to towing. “Aging Wheels” on Youtube did a test and found that payload weight makes basically no difference at all, but a trailer with bad aerodynamics can cut an electric truck’s range in half.
The maximum weight for a tractor-trailer rig in the United States is 80,000 pounds, 40 short tons or 36.36 metric tons.
A tractor-trailer rig is surprisingly streamlined. The cab is shaped and sized for the front of the trailer to ride closely in its wake, often with fairings that reach as close to the trailer as practicable. Sure it’s a brick, but it’s ONE brick:
A pickup truck towing a trailer isn’t anywhere near that slick, even with a gooseneck trailer, the trailer is often taller and wider than the cab. It’s a brick, attached to another, larger brick being pulled through the turbulent disturbed air from the first brick:
In terms of torque, EVs have a significant advantage. Electric motors produce a lot more torque at low to zero RPM than internal combustion engines do. Limited slip differentials or all-wheel drive are solved problems.
The additional energy required to accelerate the additional weight up to speed isn’t that much of a problem as an EV will get that back with regenerative braking. Well, some of it. Most trailers have brakes of their own that do help with braking distance but are there mostly to keep the hitch under tension to prevent jackknifing. An ICEV figures on losing all of that energy to friction braking, a BEV plans on recovering some of it. An electric pickup carrying 1000 pounds in the bed will be more efficient than one pulling a 1000 pound trailer, in most cases.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at with this. Here in Australia road trains haul 90 metric tons of grain and fertilizer all the time, that doesn’t include the weight of the trailers.
Regardless, I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to illustrate - your example of a “streamlined vehicle” undoubtedly consumes a lot more diesel than your example of a vehicle which is not streamlined. Isn’t that antithetical?
Yes, but a “truck” with a 4 ton towing capacity obviously needs motors with more torque than those on a tesla.
As little as 5 to 10% on the highway, not particularly significant. Installing regenerative brakes on a trailer is a lot of additional cost and complexity.
They very much are, depending on what you’re towing, most of your fuel used goes into overcoming aerodynamic drag. If you tow a load of gravel on a trailer, compared to a caravan of the same weight, the difference in fuel used can be double.
Towing something that’s not very aerodynamic can easily double your fuel use, which means half the range or less in an EV.
Disagree. The truck market itself is a no brainer, but electric trucks have design challenges that electric sedans don’t. Namely, aerodynamics, towing, and aerodynamics while towing. It is much harder to make an electric truck capable of doing “truck stuff” with a reasonable range and price compared to making an electric car.
Correct, but now consider how much time and money has been spent over the decades on making sure that “trucks can do truck stuff” for combustion vs. electric drives. “it’s much harder” is true only in the context that thousands of years of engineering time have already been poured into diesel and gas trucks, and only a tiny fraction of that has yet been dedicated to electric. So it’s not “much harder” it just “hasn’t been funded yet at the level that the oil industry has provided combustion vehicles for nearly 100 years”.
It’s not a technology/research issue; it’s an economics issue. Trucks simply need an absolutely huge battery pack to brute-force not only themselves but a boxy trailer through the air for hundreds of miles, and all but one of them don’t actually have it (even at the very expensive prices they sell for).
Look up the curve of the density of energy storage for batteries the last 20-ish years and then honestly tell me this isn’t a technology issue in the midst of being addressed.
Harder maybe but it’s clearly doable. We have a number of options now. And it’s not like they’ve had to make them hyper-aerodynamic or anything. Just took a little more advanced battery tech.
IIRC, according to Aging Wheels on YouTube, of all the electric trucks, only one (the Chevy Silvarado) actually manages to have decent range while towing.
Think it might’ve been in this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmKf8smvGsA
I believe Ford has the f150 lightning, an ev version. I don’t know how it’s been doing though.
The all electric version has been cancelled in favor of a hybrid design, but they claim the hybrid has a 700 mile range
https://www.npr.org/2025/12/15/nx-s1-5645147/ford-discontinues-all-electric-f-150-lightning
Thanks for the update